Scenarios of possible II Korean war

(….) To many experts, only thing Trump can do, is to use more visible or less visible bluff. To some experts, he has already the answer to NK (North Korea) and rest of the world.
For US situation with Syria is not even comparable with the one NK presents.
It is first time in history, when US may feel completely irritated, as small country, with some big ego dictator seems to stand up to American imperialism and globalists approach.
Kim Dzong Un managed to gain much press and PR and so far to many all around the world, he may as well become a symbol of crazy resistance to US monopoly in international affairs.
Some global witnesses voice out, that it is hypocritical, that US is imposing its will on others, but when NK wants its own nuclear arsenal to grow – it is not acceptable. These comments are as divided, as world watching war-mongering reality.

Everyone seems to also forget a bigger and more vivid problem arising on horizon: awfully quiet in recent time Iran. Sarcastically, this would give enough time for Iran to prepare itself to attack Israel. And for any smart observer, when Israel is threatened, US is automatically involved in war.

Someone would say that, of course it is not just the fact that NK decided to test its nuclear capability, but it simply threatens psychologically US or its allies. For decades NK had chance to militarily invade its neighbour SK and factually it happened few years ago with short-lived conflict.
What then suddenly has changed with US-NK situation? 2 leaders: Kim Dzong Un and Trump. Both emotional in different ways, both seeing its power expressed through military meanings.

Which one is more prone to attack?

It is absolutely understood in Pyongyang, that if facing this conflict, NK looses big time. However, who has more to lose? North Koreans with their minimalistic way of life and love for their only leader or Americans used to the fact there is usual peace in time, when America does its war business elsewhere?
This is what is so frustrating for the «big guy», who can not stand, that some small country dictates its will, so insolently.
Unfortunately for US, NK has already won this psychology and risking preemptive attack, its seems to not care as much. Why?
Because of big and very powerful ally, who happens to be also its sponsor: China. China in this situation is a key. And NK is just a playing card in this conflict.
At this point US may use tactic of targeted attack on NK military installations or simply try to take over any NK missile’s trajectory.
However NK will continue its nuclear program, regardless of precautions and preventives, unless everything is levelled to the ground on its territory. There is always another way: taking out Kim.
If US will decide to give a lesson to NK, her leader has to come to realisation that NK can not bend under this pressure, as it would make him being subjected to more pressure in future.
What are Kim’s options?
Symmetric attack on Seoul. And he would use it. There are around 25 million people living in this city. As reaction due to huge civil lost, outcome would be eventually recorded in historical books as II Korean war.
Would this benefit US? Yes and No.
Yes = after war dynamic, regional power shifts would happen very quickly. China’s role in this situation could be limited or could take completely new turn. This is probably biggest question mark.
China is generally irritated by Pyongyang nuclear program attempts, therefore it is expected China would help NK only indirectly i.e supplying it with some military force to teach Washington a lesson or two.
In this moment, US would face a conflict, which practically would be quite devastating, not to China or NK, but mainly to US economy and ally civil death ratio would cause also big downfall for US politics supporting this type military action. This fact is never forgotten by voters on both sides of spectrum.
What’s next?
Even if II Korean war would end quickly, South Korea would feel big distrust and resistance to US politics viewing it as extremely problematic. This could in consequence cause chain of reactions, leading to big countries taking over control and showing eventually Washington a different game scenario.
America is bluffing, using tactic of being unpredictable, same way NK was doing for decades. Is a good tactic? Possibly.
What is quite good, is when one crazy talk is contrasted with other crazy talk. However, in a long run, US may not have too many venues to choose from, as window of opportunity is closing fast. Only other way to end this world conflict would be giving full reign to China as regional peacemaker.
Would US however agree to that? This could cause China in coming decades and even centuries growing into unimaginable power house, just starting from point of economic growth taking place for last 30 yrs and Korean conflict helping to shape this path. It is not hard to notice, that this situation both ways benefits China. For US it is a different pair of shoes. Rather not comfortable ones.
Time will show, but if we face II Korean war, shifts in political powers will be so significant, that in next decade or so, we must prepare for much bigger scale conflict. Conflict, which would wipe out nearly half of globe population. In this sense, elites would have their triumph once again. There would be still enough of mass slaves left to serve their interest….(…)

Shortlink

Navigation

E-mail

Twitter Updates

Blogging platforms I create are usually about two topics:
1. Politics (latest updates, controversial topics, aimed to get reader to research more on the topic due to urgency of it)
2. Travel (travel updates, articles giving travel tips, aimed to bring best possible description of places and activities occuring in these places, photography, images or videos are also major venue to my travel blogs).
Enjoy reading and don't forget to leave comments!
Subscribe to my blogging below: